Blogganza Redux

Update: Gabe's response is up.

- - - - - -

During the summer, Gabe from Bounty Bowl and I did a 10-part back-and-forth on all things Eagles.  The Blogstravaganza ended up being one of the more popular things we've done around here, so with the by week upon us, we're going to roll it out again.

Gabe's been angling to keep this one a little shorter and more on point, so right now I'm thinking we're really just looking at a Blogganza.  But hey, maybe if we all goad him into continual responses, we'll earn the extra "strava."

And if I know anything about you readers, it's that you are excellent at goading people into continual responses. 

Onwards.

- - - - - -

Gabe,

There has been no shortage of story lines for this young Eagles' season, but I think once again our citywide obsession with the polarizing figures of [that guy], [that other guy] and [that guy who signs the checks] means that once again we're wasting time rehashing the same tired arguments when really we should be focused on the biggest development in Igglesland since at least the early part of 2005.

I'm talking, of course, about DeSean Jackson. 

I was flipping through my copy of Pro Football Prospectus again last night because I wanted to take another look at their "well there must be a reason" explanation for why the Cowboys have been so lucky with injuries the last few years.  After reading that, I went back to the projected stats tables at the end to see what the FO guys thought of DeSean Jackson.  Their stats:

28 receptions, 14.1 y/c, 398 yards, 2 touchdowns

If you had asked Eagles fans before the season if they would have taken those numbers, I think most would have said yes.  This obviously wouldn't have been best-case scenario, but given the underperformance of most rookie wide receivers in this offense, it seemed like a good place to start. 

Now, Jackson's actual stats:

29 receptions, 14.9 y/c, 433 yards, 1 touchdown

And really it should be two TDs.  Through six weeks.

Yes, thank you Capt. Obvious for pointing out that Curtis and Brown have both been hurt and that's why he's gotten more opportunities.  That's merely changed the when, not the what.

When he's out there (and really, why is he not always out there), Jackson looks like the best receiver on this offense.  By far.  Of course, he's not actually the best receiver.  Kevin Curtis is clearly better and Reggie Brown probably is too. 

But DeSean Jackson looks like the best receiver because when he's open, he's open.  We've spent three years arguing about separation.  Does that guy get enough separation?  Does McNabb recognize when a guy has enough separation?  How much room do you really need to squeeze a pass in? 

Then Jackson shows up and all of a sudden we're not talking about 10-inch windows, we're looking at 10 feet.

I'm also blown away by the kid's football IQ.  Think about that route LJ Smith (sort of) ran last week into Takeo Spikes.  That was an ugly play all around, but the bottom line is that the one thing you cannot do is allow the linebacker to get between you and the quarterback.  That's pretty much rule #1 on that route.  And yet LJ and Donovan weren't on the same page, the tight end kind of hesitated, wondering if he should sit in the zone, then started up again, then Donovan threw the ball right to TKO, then the stone-handed LB miraculously held onto it (who says McNabb doesn't have good touch on the ball).

Meanwhile, Jackson already has a veteran's sense of spacing in the passing game.  You can't play a regular cover two against the kid because he and McNabb are already locked in on that sideline window.  His deep catches in the middle always seem to come when he's perfectly positioned between three guys playing zone, none of whom is close enough to make a play.

Even that awful route breakoff he ran a few weeks ago came because he was trying to get to the open part of the field, rather than just running at the safety. 

To top it all off, everyone says the guy prepares like a pro, doesn't have an attitude about working hard, and -- oh yeah -- he's quickly becoming one of the league's most dangerous punt returners.

You asked via email if the 2008 Eagles are any different than the 2007 Eagles.  They are. 

Last year's Eagles didn't have DeSean Jackson.

In fact, leaving injuries aside for a moment,after six weeks, I firmly believe that the only thing standing between this Eagles' team and a championship might be bad coaching.

.......................

But wait......

You're the guy who ... I mean ... Reid is ...

Wait, what?

Yep, I said it, bad coaching.  And I mean it.  From this point forward.

Consider the following.  It's incredibly obvious at this point in time that the Eagles' front four is a) definitely stout enough to take on Marion Barber without getting tricky, but b) won't get to Tony Romo without blitzing.  What people forget, though, is that neither of those facts was known before we played the Cowboys.

So yeah, we can criticize Jim Johnson for what ended up being a pretty crappy game plan against Dallas.  He gets paid the big bucks to be a couple steps ahead and this time he wasn't.  But the truth is that he didn't know in September what kind of unit he had, or how well they would play at some spots, or how question marks would remain at others.  So it's all guesswork in the beginning.

After six games, though, the Eagles should have a pretty good sense of exactly what they have this year.  Which means next time we play the Cowboys, things should be a little different. 

Now flip this over to the offensive side of the football.  When you can move the football as well as the Ealges have with their backups, clearly you have the talent to put together a truly special attack.  The Eagles have a top 10 offense by either traditional statistical category, and unlike last year, they're actually better (7th) in terms of scoring than they are (9th) in terms of yardage.  And that's with so many of the big guns missing so much time.  (If Tom Brady or Brett Favre were doing this with these guys, the MVP talk would be deafening.)

Which obviously means the coaching on that side of the ball isn't terrible.

The problem, however, is that the Eagles seem to have a "sprinkle stuff in" offensive philosophy.  They're going to try to beat you with the same plays they've run for years, and only occasionally will they go for the cross-up.  It's a philosophy of execution rather than misdirection. 

This has to change.

Think about how good the Eagles looked on that first drive against Washington (when the defense didn't seem to have any idea what was coming).  Think about how bad they looked the rest of that game (when the defense did).

Basically, the offensive coaches need to treat every game from here on out as The Game.  Leave nothing out of the game plan.  Don't worry about showing stuff you'd rather save for later.  Instead, show so much stuff that opponents don't know what to prepare for.

If we stick with the tried-and-true, we're going to be pretty good, but at some point we'll come up short.  If we, ahem, put the pedal to the metal, then I don't think anyone can stop us.  That's going to require a bit of a personality shift, though.  And it means Reid & Co. really will need to think about putting guys in a better position to make plays.

In fact, that leads to my biggest unresolved question heading into the bye week.  The Eagles seem to have had two really special coaching moments this season.  The first was the defensive game plan against Pittsburgh, where they ran copious amounts of the Joker package and seemed to know exactly how Roethlisberger would respond to pressure from different angles.  The second was the first scripted series against Washington.

How much input did Mark Whipple have in those two cases?

Your turn.